Pre Pearl Harbor Garand questions

Does this rear sight look correct for a Nov '41 rifle?


https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

No. This is the sight that replaced the lock bar sight. It is known as the T105E1 assembly, and was adopted in Oct. Nov. 1944, as per Scott Duff. It is found on rebuilt WW2 rifles and new post war rifles.
If your rifle had remained in Govt. service after WW2 it is quite likly the original sight would have been replaced with this sight. This would not have to be done during overhaul but could have been done at the local company level of repair and maint.

Thanks Joe, I appreciate the info. Think I'll pass on the rifle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob W.

Thanks guys for the responses. I'm more of a carbine guru than Garand, so I don't know the difference between short or long pinion etc. I just know it didn't have a lock bar sight like my 8-42 SA and looked like the pics in my reference. Sounds like I wouldn't be hurt if I paid up to $1k.

---

Rob, If most parts other than rear sights and stock are correct you would not be hurt in the least by paying "up to $ 1000.00" for this rifle.
On most rifles in this range you will find the trigger group Spring Housing and the op rod catch to be in the white (unfinished). The parts pictured are from a Dec. 1941 rifle.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...rearsnof-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...nofinish-1.jpg

SMLE-MAN said "Why the wood had been swapped out was a mystery to me."

In the old days, collectors hated the Brit Proofs, would buy a fair non-proofed rifle in preference to a mint BP gun. If you had a nice unproofed rifle that needed wood, it was a no-brainer to take it off a Brit gun. Who cared about those junkers, anyway. :) How things change!